Re: dig negs (Burkholder)

To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
Subject: Re: dig negs (Burkholder)
From: Katharine Thayer <kthayer@pacifier.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 12:22:25 -0700
Comments: "alt-photo-process mailing list"
In-reply-to: <51247.153.90.248.51.1159886559.squirrel@webmail.hardyphotography.net>
List-id: alt-photo-process mailing list <alt-photo-process-l@sask.usask.ca>
References: <53404.69.144.200.234.1159765658.squirrel@webmail.hardyphotography.net><20061003101532.5A60D2031FE@spamf2.usask.ca><51175.153.90.248.51.1159884509.squirrel@webmail.hardyphotography.net><51247.153.90.248.51.1159886559.squirrel@webmail.hardyphotography.net>
Reply-to: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca

On Oct 3, 2006, at 7:42 AM, Camden Hardy wrote:

One more note, and then I'm done with this topic (I can hear your
rejoicing now). :)

My initial reply to this thread was written quickly, and as a result I
think a lot of people (possibly everyone) misunderstood me.

Well, if you want to be understood as meaning that you simply prefer Mark's method as a personal preference, then don't say that Dan's method "doesn't work very well." I didn't think you were attacking Dan, but I was offended, as I will always be, by a categorical statement that I know to be false.
Katharine

Follow-Ups:
- Re: dig negs (Burkholder)
  - From: sanking@CLEMSON.EDU

References:
- RE: dig negs (Burkholder)
  - From: Camden Hardy <camden@hardyphotography.net>
- RE: dig negs (Burkholder)
  - From: Loris Medici <mail@loris.medici.name>
- RE: dig negs (Burkholder)
  - From: Camden Hardy <camden@hardyphotography.net>
- RE: dig negs (Burkholder)
  - From: Camden Hardy <camden@hardyphotography.net>